Fuji raw files turns purple in LR (X-T2)

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
MOD BobsYourUncle Veteran Member • Posts: 5,145
Re: Bet it's a WB setting error in camera

Cliff Fujii wrote:

BobsYourUncle wrote:

Cliff Fujii wrote:

BobsYourUncle wrote:

Ambulater wrote:

Cliff Fujii wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

I have suspected for a few weeks that it is the programming of the evaluative metering system. If yo say full manual -- that means a lot of things. I'm an old full manual shooter from way back. There are two ways to do full manual. One of the ways you are just manually setting what the meter suggests anyway. The other you are setting what you want on both F stop and speed and letting the auto ISO run wild. Either way, you are still using whatever meter you chose.

When I say full manual, I mean no automation. I take my readings with a Minolta Flash Meter III that's been biased for the sensor I'm using and use the Minolta as a starting point. BTW...I was surprised to hear that Minolta meters are still living on. Kenko is making the Minolta line of meters under it's own brand.

Cliff, you know me ... I love Fuji but I promise you there is a problem here. I be it can be fixed in a firmware update. There is something going on here with the programming of the metering system -- especially evaluative, which I really like to use a lot..... Granted .... I do shoot a lot of high contrast and wide dynamic range settings where the slightest movement of the camera can swing the settings drastically. It is one f the reasons I like evaluative metering. It gets the closest to the middle so I can adjust both ways in post.

I think that Fuji is biasing the camera towards inexperienced users (to bad they don't have a beginning mode) to make their cameras more popular. It seems that Fuji users are more likely to be JPG shooters (with it's low ability to be adjusted) and Fuji is just trying to accommodate. There must be some black magic going on with the JPG converter as even shots underexposed by 1 stop still looks good. I wish they would publish their formula so that Adobe can pick it up and include it in LRCC. When I shoot my Nikon, I routinely add 2/3 of a stop in exposure compensation because Nikon tends to protect the highlights also. The thins is that Nikon requires this and all of my shots were 2/3 underexposed. Maybe Fuji will allow you to turn off evaluative metering in the future.

But this full-stop underexposure has got to stop. I can't just compensate every shot because it only happens about 20% of the time. The problem is I don't see it in the EVF, and if Fuji is underexposing by a stop I should see that immediately. I only see it later in LR.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

It would be helpful if Fuji makes the metering more consistent. I tend to shoot using the matrix meter (aperture priority) or spot meter (manual). While I have noticed the underexposure, I've been able to compensate for it in LRCC. The histogram is your best friend. Of course I severely cull my images in the field and I'm basically a lazy person that would rather not invest time in marginal images.

-- hide signature --

Cliff

A question for the guys seeing underexposure in LR: Are you by any chance using any DR settings other than DR100? LR handles the ISO shift okay for DR200 and DR400 (but does not then adjust the tone curve, shadows, and highlights the way the Fuji JPG engine does for extended DR settings).

The bigger problem with LR comes with DR Auto when your camera automatically selects DR200. For some reason, LR doesn't recognize and correct the ISO shift when the camera is in DR Auto and you end up getting underexposed RAW files. Of course, being RAW, it's not problem to fix, but it's kind of a pain and inconsistent with how this normally works.

Since I shoot in RAW, and knowing that LR doesn't handle extended DR settings very well, I usually just keep the camera in DR100. Not sure if that has anything to do with your under exposed pics, but thought I'd throw it out there.

-- hide signature --

Chris Lee

Check out the front end of the following thread if you haven't already. I had the cam set to DR Auto and was experiencing the same issue with LR but not with other RAW converters.

Anomalous Behavior Thread from Monday

Yes, I read that yesterday. I don't know why it got locked but locked it is. There are some RAW converters that don't know how to handle DR. With Iridient, I think the tag is passed to LRCC and Adobe has to perform the adjustments necessary. I just updated my LRCC to 2015.10 so there might be some changes on how DR is handled in LRCC. I don't use DR Auto so I've never noticed the issue. I wish someone would figure out how to read the LMO tag (if there is one) so that LMO is available to RAW converters.

-- hide signature --

Cliff

The behavior occurred with the updated LRCC and ACR so we'll have to wait. It is easy enough to make modifications with the current behavior but it is nonetheless annoying. I may just load the RAFS on my Windows machine then run Iridient Transformer......walk away until it is done, then copy the dng's to the Mac and continue with LR. Sounds involved but not really much time lost.

Bob

I updated my LRCC to 2015.10 yesterday through my CC account. I think this is a new version so maybe some of RAF issues have been fixed. I use X-Transformer so as long as Adobe doesn't mess up the Develop module, I'm OK.

-- hide signature --

Cliff

Thanks,

I'll check but every time I boot the Mac Adobe checks and pesters me when there is a new update so I think I have the current version.  At my office until late tonight then I'll check.

Bob

 BobsYourUncle's gear list:BobsYourUncle's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-E2 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow